9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (8) TMI 670X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... icence No.0310167855 dated 20.11.2002 claiming duty exemption under Notification No.46/2002-Cus. The department felt that since the product exported against the said licence was said to contain 70% polyester resin and 30% glass fibre by weight, there was no nexus between the export product and the goods imported under the said licence and accordingly the adjudicating authority rejected the claim of the respondent by denying the benefit under Notification 46/2002 dated 22.4.2002. The importer preferred an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) who vide the impugned order allowed the appeal on the ground that under the DFRC certificate the goods are covered under SIO S.No.1037 which reads as under:- 1037 Export Item Qty Import Item Qty all ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sel appearing for the respondent submits that even though SIO No.1037 described the export product as mentioned above, the items permitted to be imported under the said entry reads as 'relevant synthetic resin (unsaturated polyester resin, epoxy resin, vinyl ester resin, hydroxy ethyl cellulose).' Since the import item permissible covers hydroxy ethyl cellulose, they are eligible to import the said item free of duty under Notification No.46/2002 dated 22.4.2002.They further submit that the Joint DGFT, Mumbai has also clarified this position vide letter dated 27.1.2003 addressed to the Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai wherein he has clarified as follows: "A general reading of the norm clearly indicates that the intention of the said norm is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ows: "Having allowed export of motors with input specifications as bearings upto 50 mm bore, it may not be appropriate for the customs authorities to insist on technical specifications at the time of import of bearings. Further, we also find that the specifications provided in the DFIA authorization have to be considered as sufficient for the customs purpose since the specifications are based on goods exported under a shipping bill. Therefore the responsibility to ensure that exporter gives a proper declaration while making exports in the shipping bill lies on both customs as well as DGFT authorities and having missed the bus at the time of export, it may not be correct to insist on specifications from a transferee of DFIA.' The same prin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
